Hamilton Elementary School (revision)-YingyingZhang
Information of school
Address: 25 Salisbury Avenue North Kingstown, RI, 02852 (401) 268-6520 District: North Kingstown Year compared: 2002 vs. 2013 Subjects compared: Math and reading(or English language art) Grade compared: Grade4 Data Resource:http://infoworks.ride.ri.gov/ Student Demographics: 96% white, 1% Asian, 1% Hispanic, 1% African American, 1% Multiracial
Introduction: This article focuses on Hamilton Elementary School demographics and achievement test scores. It compares data gathered from Infroworks! In 2002 and 2013, seeking to see if NCLB and RTTT make a difference in students’scores and reach the conclusion. It is important to do this survey tin order to get an idea of what NCLB and RTTT impact in North Kingston and Rhode Island. Hamilton Elementary School is one of the eight schools in District North Kingstown.Grades range from kindergarten to fifth grade. In 2002, there was 458 students, more than 437 students in 2013 even though Kindergarten-3 was added in the school year 2010-2011. However, there was an increase in teachers' number from 20 to 31. Hamilton Elementary School is affluent in an overall view with a stable students characteristics and less needs form culture and language. According to their data, around 96% of the students are white, and less than 1% students are taking ESL classes.(2002, 0%;2013,<1%). The of students are all higher than the state in both of the two years. Students who has subsidized lunch take less percentage comparing with the state average. However, there are still some differences in students characteristics. The rate for students who has subsidized lunch goes higher in 2013, from 5% to 13%, while students who receive special education are getting less, from 16% to 7%.
Academic performance of school
Hamilton Elementary School is a high-performing school in all these years. Students get higher scores than state average in both years and subjects. In 2002, we could get more details of the data of each part of math and English language art. In 2013, we could only get the general results. Here we will use percentage matching methods to estimate, there should be some error in estimating. As long as the data difference is obvious, we could still get some conclusions. To explain percentage matching, you could take a look at the table below. In order to compare, I would like to keep state rates the same and change the rate of school. For example, in 2013, school rate vs. State rate is 86% vs. 63%, we now split this rate into three parts. We will keep the state rates (in yellow )in both years are the same(63%, 35%, 27%), then 86% vs. 63% could be changed to (86% vs. 63%, 48% vs. 35%, 37% vs. 27%)
2002 (This school-the state)
2013(This school-the state)
Math
skills
88%-63%
86%-63%(by estimate)
conceptions
58%-35%
48%-35%(by estimate)
problem-solving
36%-27%
37%-27%(by estimate)
Math
86%-63%
Results analysis: From the table above, by using percentage matching methods , we could find the it has no big difference in skills and problem-solving. But math scores get lower in concepts in 2013 by about 10%.
2002(This school-the state)
2013(This school- the state)
English language art
understanding
89%-69%
83%-69%(by estimate)
analysis and interpretation
82%-57%
68%-57%(by estimate)
writing effectiveness
73%-63%
76%-63%(by estimate)
writing conversations
78%-56%
67%-56%(by estimate)
Reading
84%-70%
Results analysis: From the table above, by using percentage matching methods , we could find the reading scores get a little lower in English analysis and writing conversations in 2013. Summary: As a whole, we could see in these two years, students are doing good, much higher than the state level. Math and English scores go a little lower in some aspects literally, but there are no significant differences.
Conclusion
For school demographics, as most of the data seems no different, there are two significant changes in 2013. There are less students at school, but more poor students (5%-13%). At the same time, special education drops greatly, almost drops half(16%-7%). For influences on the tests scores, we could get the conclusion that NCLB and RTTT did not influence the scores in these two years too much. The scores have changed a little bit (with a little dropping in some aspects), but without significant differences. Since there is still little dropping in 2013, we may take poverty into consideration. For less special education, there are no obvious evidences to show the meaning and reasons behind it. Generally, the school should pay enough attention to special education and poor students. However, no matter what NCLB has influenced Rhode Island, Rhode Island get the state more freedom to implement reforms and increased flexibility. In May 29, 2012, the U.S. Department of Education today announced that Rhode Island’s application for a waiver from key provisions of the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act has been granted after Rhode Island adopted several education reforms to improve school accountability, enhance teacher and principal effectiveness, turn around low-performing schools.
Information of school
Address: 25 Salisbury Avenue North Kingstown, RI, 02852 (401) 268-6520
District: North Kingstown
Year compared: 2002 vs. 2013
Subjects compared: Math and reading(or English language art)
Grade compared: Grade4
Data Resource:http://infoworks.ride.ri.gov/
Student Demographics: 96% white, 1% Asian, 1% Hispanic, 1% African American, 1% Multiracial
Introduction: This article focuses on Hamilton Elementary School demographics and achievement test scores. It compares data gathered from Infroworks! In 2002 and 2013, seeking to see if NCLB and RTTT make a difference in students’scores and reach the conclusion. It is important to do this survey tin order to get an idea of what NCLB and RTTT impact in North Kingston and Rhode Island.
Hamilton Elementary School is one of the eight schools in District North Kingstown.Grades range from kindergarten to fifth grade. In 2002, there was 458 students, more than 437 students in 2013 even though Kindergarten-3 was added in the school year 2010-2011. However, there was an increase in teachers' number from 20 to 31.
Hamilton Elementary School is affluent in an overall view with a stable students characteristics and less needs form culture and language. According to their data, around 96% of the students are white, and less than 1% students are taking ESL classes.(2002, 0%;2013,<1%). The of students are all higher than the state in both of the two years. Students who has subsidized lunch take less percentage comparing with the state average. However, there are still some differences in students characteristics. The rate for students who has subsidized lunch goes higher in 2013, from 5% to 13%, while students who receive special education are getting less, from 16% to 7%.
Academic performance of school
Hamilton Elementary School is a high-performing school in all these years. Students get higher scores than state average in both years and subjects. In 2002, we could get more details of the data of each part of math and English language art. In 2013, we could only get the general results. Here we will use percentage matching methods to estimate, there should be some error in estimating. As long as the data difference is obvious, we could still get some conclusions.
To explain percentage matching, you could take a look at the table below. In order to compare, I would like to keep state rates the same and change the rate of school. For example, in 2013, school rate vs. State rate is 86% vs. 63%, we now split this rate into three parts. We will keep the state rates (in yellow )in both years are the same(63%, 35%, 27%), then 86% vs. 63% could be changed to (86% vs. 63%, 48% vs. 35%, 37% vs. 27%)
From the table above, by using percentage matching methods , we could find the it has no big difference in skills and problem-solving. But math scores get lower in concepts in 2013 by about 10%.
Results analysis:
From the table above, by using percentage matching methods , we could find the reading scores get a little lower in English analysis and writing conversations in 2013.
Summary:
As a whole, we could see in these two years, students are doing good, much higher than the state level. Math and English scores go a little lower in some aspects literally, but there are no significant differences.
Conclusion
For school demographics, as most of the data seems no different, there are two significant changes in 2013. There are less students at school, but more poor students (5%-13%). At the same time, special education drops greatly, almost drops half(16%-7%).
For influences on the tests scores, we could get the conclusion that NCLB and RTTT did not influence the scores in these two years too much. The scores have changed a little bit (with a little dropping in some aspects), but without significant differences. Since there is still little dropping in 2013, we may take poverty into consideration. For less special education, there are no obvious evidences to show the meaning and reasons behind it. Generally, the school should pay enough attention to special education and poor students.
However, no matter what NCLB has influenced Rhode Island, Rhode Island get the state more freedom to implement reforms and increased flexibility. In May 29, 2012, the U.S. Department of Education today announced that Rhode Island’s application for a waiver from key provisions of the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act has been granted after Rhode Island adopted several education reforms to improve school accountability, enhance teacher and principal effectiveness, turn around low-performing schools.
Reference:
Rhode Isalnd Education Data Reporting, I. (n.d.). Hamilton Elementary School. Retrieved from http://infoworks.ride.ri.gov/school/hamilton-elementary-school
United States Senator for Rhode Isaland. (n.d.). RI Receives NCLB Waiver. Retrieved from http://www.reed.senate.gov/news/releases/ri-receives-nclb-waiver